DOCSLIB.ORG

Reconsidering the Roman Catholic Apocrypha Alex Andersen Southeastern University - Lakeland, [email protected]

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Reconsidering the Roman Catholic Apocrypha Alex Andersen Southeastern University - Lakeland, Aanderson@Seu.Edu Southeastern University FireScholars Classical Conversations Spring 2019 Reconsidering the Roman Catholic Apocrypha Alex Andersen Southeastern University - Lakeland, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://firescholars.seu.edu/ccplus Part of the Catholic Studies Commons, and the Religious Thought, Theology and Philosophy of Religion Commons Recommended Citation Andersen, Alex, "Reconsidering the Roman Catholic Apocrypha" (2019). Classical Conversations. 3. https://firescholars.seu.edu/ccplus/3 This Term Paper is brought to you for free and open access by FireScholars. It has been accepted for inclusion in Classical Conversations by an authorized administrator of FireScholars. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Southeastern University Reconsidering the Roman Catholic Apocrypha Alex Andersen English 1233 Professor Grace Veach April 12, 2019 Andersen 1 Abstract For centuries, Protestants have debated with Roman Catholics and Orthodox Christians over the canonicity of the Roman Catholic Apocrypha, a collection of seven books and two additions to books composed from the third century B.C. to the first century A.D. and considered to be canonical by all major non-Protestant Christian denominations. This thesis plunges into this discussion on the Roman Catholic Apocrypha’s canonicity, contending that the Roman Catholic Apocrypha is noncanonical. First, this thesis propounds two broad models for canonicity, the Community Canon Model and the Intrinsic Canon Model, and maintains that the Intrinsic Canon Model is a better model for canonicity than the Community Canon Model. It then explains that many books in the Roman Catholic Apocrypha do not fit the Intrinsic Canon Model’s criteria for canonicity. Next, an argument is made that the Jews had fixed the Hebrew canon during the lifetimes of Jesus and the apostles and that this Hebrew canon excluded the Roman Catholic Apocrypha. This thesis then establishes that Jesus and the apostles implicitly and explicitly accepted the Hebrew canon and thereby rejected the Roman Catholic Apocrypha’s canonicity. Finally, the popular notion that the Roman Catholic Apocrypha is canonical because most Christians in the early and medieval church accepted the Roman Catholic Apocrypha’s canonicity is refuted. Andersen 2 Reconsidering the Roman Catholic Apocrypha In Psalm 119:105, a psalmist declared, “Your word is a lamp to my feet and a light to my path” (English Standard Version). All Christians would agree that God’s Word, the Bible, guides humanity toward goodness and truth. Nevertheless, at present, Christians widely disagree on what the exact content of the Bible should be. All major Christian denominations believe that the sixty-six books of the Protestant Bible are God’s Word. However, according to The New Oxford Annotated Apocrypha, whereas Protestant denominations have only thirty-nine books in their Old Testament (OT), all major non-Protestant Christian denominations include, in their Old Testaments, books or parts of books which are outside of the Protestant Bible and are from a collection known as the “Apocrypha” or “Deuterocanon” (3-4). Thus, either Protestants omit books which are really the Word of God from their Bibles, or non-Protestants consider certain books which are not divinely inspired to be God’s revelation to humanity. It is therefore important to ask: are the books of the Apocrypha worthy of canonicity? This thesis will first address the definitions of the terms “Apocrypha” and “canon,” as well as two models of canonicity and their differing criteria. Then, this thesis will show that the Roman Catholic Apocrypha is noncanonical for three reasons: the proper criteria for canonicity disqualify the Apocrypha, the first century Hebrew canon excluded the Apocrypha, and Jesus and the apostles rejected the Apocrypha. Finally, this thesis will examine and refute one reason why many Christians accept the canonicity of the Apocrypha. Andersen 3 Defining “Apocrypha” and “Canon” Before examining the canonicity of the Apocrypha, it is important to explain what the Apocrypha is. According to Beckwith, Origen, a third century Christian writer, stated that Jews used the term “Apocrypha” to designate books which they highly valued but which they nevertheless did not accept as canonical (2581). Jerome, a fourth century Christian theologian who translated the Bible into Latin and thereby created the Vulgate, became the first Christian to use the term “Apocrypha” to designate books which Christians esteemed but which he believed were noncanonical (Beckwith 2581). The term “Apocrypha” comes from the Greek word “apokrypha,” which means “having been hidden away” (Beckwith 2581). This term was perhaps coined because in ancient times, Jews would hide certain highly regarded religious books and leave them to decay naturally instead of burning them (Beckwith 2581). At present, Roman Catholics employ the term “Deuterocanon,” a term coined by Sixtus of Sienna in 1566, to identify their canonized portion of the Apocrypha, and they identify the Protestant Bible by the term “protocanon” (The New Oxford Annotated Apocrypha 3-4). This thesis will employ the more widely used terms “Apocrypha” and “apocryphal” instead of the Roman Catholic terms “Deuterocanon” and “Deuterocanonical.” Although Jerome’s list of apocryphal books was broader than the modern list of apocryphal books, at present the term “Apocrypha” refers to a distinct collection of fourteen books (Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Sirach, Baruch, Letter of Jeremiah, 1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees, 1 Esdras, the Prayer of Manasseh, Psalm 151, 3 Maccabees, 2 Esdras, and 4 Maccabees) and two additions to books (the Additions to Esther and the Additions to Daniel) (Beckwith 2581; The New Oxford Annotated Apocrypha 4). Most, if not all, of these books were written after the Andersen 4 composition of the book of Malachi and before the writing of the last book of the New Testament (NT): more precisely, between about 300 B.C. and A.D. 100 (Gentry 2602). The number of apocryphal books which non-Protestant Christian denominations accept as canonical varies (The New Oxford Annotated Apocrypha 4). Currently, all main non-Protestant Christian denominations accept as canonical the Roman Catholic Apocrypha (the Deuterocanon), consisting of Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Sirach, Baruch, Letter of Jeremiah, 1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees, the Additions to Esther, and the Additions to Daniel (The New Oxford Annotated Apocrypha 4). However, in addition to the Roman Catholic Apocrypha, the Greek Orthodox Church recognizes 1 Esdras, the Prayer of Manasseh, Psalm 151, and 3 Maccabees as canonical (The New Oxford Annotated Apocrypha 4). Furthermore, in addition to the books accepted by the Greek Orthodox Church, the Russian Orthodox Church accepts 2 Esdras as canonical (The New Oxford Annotated Apocrypha 4). A few Christian denominations, such as the Ethiopian Orthodox Church, even accept books outside of the Protestant Bible and the Apocrypha as canonical (Blocher 83). Despite this disagreement over the biblical canon, because all non- Protestant Christian denominations agree on the canonicity of the Roman Catholic Apocrypha, this thesis will examine the canonicity of only the seven books and two additions to books in the Roman Catholic Apocrypha. It is also important to define what is meant by “canon,” “canonical,” and “canonicity.” According to Hunt, the word “canon” derives from the Akkadian word “ganu” (meaning “rod,” often referring to a measuring rod) and the Greek word “kanon” (meaning “rule” or “standard”) (55). From about A.D. 350 onward, Christians began using the term “canon” to refer to both a doctrinal and a moral standard, and eventually this word meant a collection of divinely inspired texts (Hunt 55). The Jews, however, called their authoritative books “sacred writings” rather Andersen 5 than “canonical books,” and they divided their authoritative books into two groups (Hunt 55-56). The first collection comprised books which “defiled the hands” because of their sacred nature and were authoritative both for theological doctrine and for moral practice1 (Hunt 56). This collection consisted of the Hebrew canon, which is identical in content to the Protestant Old Testament (Hunt 56). The second collection were books which Jews highly esteemed yet could not “defile the hands” because they lacked divine inspiration (Hunt 56). The latter group of books included authoritative examples of how to properly apply the theological doctrines found in the Hebrew canon, but these writings were not authoritative for theological doctrine (Hunt 56). For the Jews, this less authoritative assortment of books included the Apocrypha, the Pseudepigrapha (a collection of writings purportedly written by biblical figures), the Talmud (which included the Mishnah [ancient interpretations of the books of the Law] and commentaries on the Mishnah called the Gemara), and the Halakah (interpretations of the books of the Law written after the Mishnah and Gemara) (Hunt 56). Today, Anglican Christians still retain a similar distinction: the canonical books of the Protestant Bible are authoritative for both doctrine and moral practice, while the apocryphal books are revered only as examples of righteous living (Hunt 63). Following the Jewish definition of divinely inspired writings, a “canon” refers to the complete collection of canonical books, a book which is “canonical” is one which God has divinely inspired and is authoritative for both doctrine and morality, and “canonicity”
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 4Q521 and What It Might Mean for Q 3–7
    Chapter 20 4Q521 and What It Might Mean for Q 3–7 Gaye Strathearn am personally grateful for S. Kent Brown. He was a commit- I tee member for my master’s thesis, in which I examined 4Q521. Since that time he has been a wonderful colleague who has always encouraged me in my academic pursuits. The relationship between the Dead Sea Scrolls and Christian- ity has fueled the imagination of both scholar and layperson since their discovery in 1947. Were the early Christians aware of the com- munity at Qumran and their texts? Did these groups interact in any way? Was the Qumran community the source for nascent Chris- tianity, as some popular and scholarly sources have intimated,¹ or was it simply a parallel community? One Qumran fragment that 1. For an example from the popular press, see Richard N. Ostling, “Is Jesus in the Dead Sea Scrolls?” Time Magazine, 21 September 1992, 56–57. See also the claim that the scrolls are “the earliest Christian records” in the popular novel by Dan Brown, The Da Vinci Code (New York: Doubleday, 2003), 245. For examples from the academic arena, see André Dupont-Sommer, The Dead Sea Scrolls: A Preliminary Survey (New York: Mac- millan, 1952), 98–100; Robert Eisenman, James the Just in the Habakkuk Pesher (Leiden: Brill, 1986), 1–20; Barbara E. Thiering, The Gospels and Qumran: A New Hypothesis (Syd- ney: Theological Explorations, 1981), 3–11; Carsten P. Thiede, The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Jewish Origins of Christianity (New York: Palgrave, 2001), 152–81; José O’Callaghan, “Papiros neotestamentarios en la cueva 7 de Qumrān?,” Biblica 53/1 (1972): 91–100.
    [Show full text]
  • Apocrypha on Jesus' Life in the Early Islamic Milieu: from Syriac Into Arabic
    Apocrypha on Jesus’ Life in the Early Islamic Milieu: From Syriac into Arabic* Cornelia B. Horn Apocryphal traditions are narratives and stories about figures and events that feature some noticeable relationship to biblical traditions, but that are con- ceived and told in a way that clearly goes beyond the data that is found in the contemporary canonical texts.1 They are central texts and traditions, in which wider circles of Christians expressed their reception of and interaction with the core of the biblical message, that God worked and continued to work in their own history. In the eastern Christian world, apocrypha are often an integral part of traditions comprising hagiography and liturgical traditions as well.2 Apocryphal texts and traditions hold a key position right in the mid- dle and in-between the biblical and patristic writings anywhere in Oriental Christian literature and Christian literature more broadly. Christian literature in Arabic is no exception to this. In fact, Arabic apocrypha play a crucial role in the transmission of Oriental Christian traditions into a world, which in the Middle East from the seventh century onwards was increasingly dominated by a new religion, Islam.3 Christian apocryphal writings constitute a prominent reservoire of traditions that allow the modern researcher to trace connections between developping sacred scriptures beyond the boundaries of religions. At times, the trajectories of such interreligious connections are even traceable with chronological and geographical precision. For the study of the interaction of Christians and Muslims in the framework of apocryphal traditions, Christian Arabic witnesses ought to have a role of * The research and writing of this article occurred in part while I held a Heisenberg Fellowship (GZ HO 5221/1–1) and in part during my tenure as Heisenberg Professor of Languages and Cultures of the Christian Orient at the Martin-Luther-University, Halle-Wittenberg (GZ HO 5221/2–1).
    [Show full text]
  • The Identification of “The Righteous” in the Psalms of Solomon(Psssol1))
    DOI: https://doi.org/10.28977/jbtr.2011.10.29.149 The Identification of “the Righteous” in the Psalms of Solomon / Unha Chai 149 The Identification of “the Righteous” in the Psalms of Solomon(PssSol1)) Unha Chai* 1. The Problem The frequent references to “the righteous” and to a number of other terms and phrases2) variously used to indicate them have constantly raised the most controversial issue studied so far in the Psalms of Solomon3) (PssSol). No question has received more attention than that of the ideas and identity of the righteous in the PssSol. Different views on the identification of the righteous have been proposed until now. As early as 1874 Wellhausen proposed that the righteous in the PssSol refer to the Pharisees and the sinners to the Sadducees.4) * Hanil Uni. & Theological Seminary. 1) There is wide agreement on the following points about the PssSol: the PssSol were composed in Hebrew and very soon afterwards translated into Greek(11MSS), then at some time into Syriac(4MSS). There is no Hebrew version extant. They are generally to be dated from 70 BCE to Herodian time. There is little doubt that the PssSol were written in Jerusalem. The English translation for this study is from “the Psalms of Solomon” by R. Wright in The OT Pseudepigrapha 2 (J. Charlesworth, ed.), 639-670. The Greek version is from Septuaginta II (A. Rahlfs, ed.), 471-489; G. W. E. Nickelsburg, Jewish Literature between the Bible and the Mishnah, 203-204; K. Atkinson, “On the Herodian Origin of Militant Davidic Messianism at Qumran: New Light From Psalm of Solomon 17”, JBL 118 (1999), 440-444.
    [Show full text]
  • Suffered Under Pontius Pila Te
    SUFFERED UNDER PONTIUS PILA TE Addendum erat judicis nomen propter temporum cognitionem says St Augustine (De fide et symbolo, PL 40, 187). But was Pilate's name put into the Creed simply to give the date ~ What was his part in Christ's condemnation ~ Was he really the monster which Christian legend has made him, or was he browbeaten and put upon by the Jewish authorities ~ Was he cruel or a conscientious, perhaps too conscientious, administrator ~ The gospel accounts alone cannot answer these questions for us, for they are not especially interested in Pilate, and do not give us a sufficiently clear picture of him. They must be interpreted in the light of the other sources. This will compel us to work in narrowing circles towards the centre of interest. First we must examine the worth of the sources for the history of this period, and try to discover their purpose and any bias they have. Then we must deal with the general tensions between the Jews and the occupying power during the Roman administration of Palestine. The field then narrows to the incidents between Pilate and the Jews. Finally we come to the trial scene. The sources for this period of Palestinian history are meagre in the extreme, but they are not so meagre as they are tricky to handle. For most of our information we must rely on Josephus. Josephus was a general in the Jewish rising of 66-70 A.D., who after his capture by the Romans wrote two histories, one The Jewish War, the other The Antiquities of the Jews.
    [Show full text]
  • Eng-Kjv 2MA.Pdf 2 Maccabees
    2 Maccabees 1:1 1 2 Maccabees 1:10 The Second Book of the Maccabees 1 The brethren, the Jews that be at Jerusalem and in the land of Judea, wish unto the brethren, the Jews that are throughout Egypt health and peace: 2 God be gracious unto you, and remember his covenant that he made with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, his faithful servants; 3 And give you all an heart to serve him, and to do his will, with a good courage and a willing mind; 4 And open your hearts in his law and commandments, and send you peace, 5 And hear your prayers, and be at one with you, and never forsake you in time of trouble. 6 And now we be here praying for you. 7 What time as Demetrius reigned, in the hundred threescore and ninth year, we the Jews wrote unto you in the extremity of trouble that came upon us in those years, from the time that Jason and his company revolted from the holy land and kingdom, 8 And burned the porch, and shed innocent blood: then we prayed unto the Lord, and were heard; we offered also sacrifices and fine flour, and lighted the lamps, and set forth the loaves. 9 And now see that ye keep the feast of tabernacles in the month Casleu. 10 In the hundred fourscore and eighth year, the people that were at Jerusalem and in Judea, and the council, and Judas, sent greeting and health unto Aristobulus, king Ptolemeus’ master, who was of the stock of the anointed priests, and to the Jews that were in Egypt: 2 Maccabees 1:11 2 2 Maccabees 1:20 11 Insomuch as God hath delivered us from great perils, we thank him highly, as having been in battle against a king.
    [Show full text]
  • The Jews of Hellenistic Egypt Jews in Egypt Judahites to E
    15 April 2019 Septuagint, Synagogue, and Symbiosis: Jews in Egypt The Jews of Hellenistic Egypt Those who escaped the Babylonian advance on Jerusalem, 605‐586 B.C.E. Gary A. Rendsburg Rutgers University Jeremiah 44:1 ַה ָדּ ָב ֙ר ֲא ֶ ֣שׁר ָהָי֣ה ֶ ֽא ִל־יְר ְמָ֔יהוּ ֶ֚אל ָכּל־ ַהְיּ ִ֔הוּדים ַהיֹּ ְשׁ ִ ֖בים ְבּ ֶ ֣אֶר ץ ִמ ְצָ ֑ר ִים Mandelbaum House ַהיֹּ ְשׁ ִ ֤בים ְבּ ִמ ְגדֹּ ֙ל ְוּב ַת ְח ַפּ ְנ ֵ ֣חס ְוּב֔נֹף וּ ְב ֶ ֥אֶרץ ַפּ ְת ֖רוֹס ֵל ֽ ֹאמר׃ April 2019 4 The word which was to Jeremiah, concerning all the Jews who dwell in the land of Egypt, who dwell in Migdol, Tahpanhes, Noph, and the land of Pathros, saying. Judahites to Egypt 600 – 585 B.C.E. Pathros Map of the Persian (Achaemenid) Empire 538 – 333 B.C.E. Bust of the young Alexander the Great (c. 100 B.C.E.) (British Museum) Empire of Alexander the Great (356‐323 B.C.E.) / (r. 336‐323 B.C.E.) 1 15 April 2019 Cartouche of Alexander the Great N L c. 330 B.C.E. D I K A (Louvre, Paris) R S S The Four Successor Kingdoms to Alexander the Great Ptolemies – Alexandria, Egypt (blue) Selecudis – Seleukia / Antioch (golden) Ptolemy Dynasty Jews under Alexander and Ptolemy I 305 B.C.E. – 30 B.C.E. Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews, Book 12, Chapter 1 • Ptolemy brought Jews from Judea and Jerusalem to Egypt. Founded by Ptolemy I, • He had heard that the Jews had been loyal to Alexander.
    [Show full text]
  • Ford-Judgment in 4 Ezra, 2 Baruch, and Apocalypse of Abraham FINAL
    Abstract Judgment in 4 Ezra, 2 Baruch, and Apocalypse of Abraham By: Jason Ford When the Roman army destroyed Jerusalem’s temple in 70 CE, it altered Jewish imagination and compelled religious and community leaders to devise messages of consolation. These messages needed to address both the contemporary situation and maintain continuity with Israel’s religious history. 4 Ezra, 2 Baruch, and Apocalypse of Abraham are three important witnesses to these new messages hope in the face of devastation. In this dissertation I focus on how these three authors used and explored the important religious theme of judgment. Regarding 4 Ezra, I argue that by focusing our reading on judgment and its role in the text’s message we uncover 4 Ezra’s essential meaning. 4 Ezra’s main character misunderstands the implications of the destroyed Temple and, despite rounds of dialogue with and angelic interlocutor, he only comes to see God’s justice for Israel in light of the end-time judgment God shows him in two visions. Woven deeply into the fabric of his story, the author of 2 Baruch utilizes judgment for different purposes. With the community’s stability and guidance in question, 2 Baruch promises the coming of God’s judgment on the wicked nations, as well as the heavenly reward for Israel itself. In that way, judgment serves a pedagogical purpose in 2 Baruch–to stabilize and inspire the community through its teaching. Of the three texts, Apocalypse of Abraham explores the meaning of judgment must directly. It also offers the most radical portrayal of judgment.
    [Show full text]
  • Apocrypha, Part 1
    Understanding Apocrypha, Part 1 Sources: Scripture Alone, James R. White, 112-119 The Journey from Texts to Translations: The Origin and Development of the Bible, Paul D. Wegner, 101-130 The Doctrine of the Word of God, John M. Frame, 118-139 Can We Still Believe the Bible? An Evangelical Engagement with Contemporary Questions, by Craig L. Blomberg, 43-54 How We Got the Bible, Neil R. Lightfoot, 152-156 “The Old Testament Canon, Josephus, and Cognitive Environment” by Stephen G. Dempster, in The Enduring Authority of the Christian Scriptures, D.A. Carson, editor, 321-361 “Reflections on Jesus’ View of the Old Testament” by Craig L. Blomberg, in The Enduring Authority of the Christian Scriptures, D.A. Carson, editor, 669-701 “The Canon of the Old Testament” by R.T. Beckwith, in The Origin of the Bible, edited by F.F. Bruce, J.I. Packer, Philip Comfort, Carl F.H. Henry, 51-64 “Do We Have the Right Canon?” by Paul D. Wegner, Terry L. Wilder, and Darrell L. Bock, in In Defense of the Bible: A Comprehensive Apologetic for the Authority of Scripture, edited by Steven B. Cowan and Terry L. Wilder, 393-404 Can I Really Trust the Bible?, Barry Cooper, 49-53 Establishing Our Time Frame What are apocryphal books? The word “apocrypha” refers to something hidden (Protestants and Catholics differ on why the term is applied to particular books). It is a general term often used for books not in the biblical canon (apocryphal books), but is also used by Protestants as a specific term for the books officially canonized by the Roman Catholic Church (The Apocrypha).
    [Show full text]
  • Bible Book Club Additions to Daniel
    Bible Book Club Additions to Daniel The original book of Daniel was written in both Hebrew (1.1-21 and 8–12) and Aramaic (2–7). There are, however, three additional chapters that exist only in Greek. The Prayer of Azariah and the Song of the Three Holy Children (Sometimes called the Song of the Three Jewsinserted between Daniel 3.23 and 3.24); the Story of Susanna (sometimes found before 1.1 and sometimes as chapter 13) and the story of Bel and the Dragon (sometimes found after 12.13 and sometimes as chapter 14 of the book). The Prayer of Azariah and the Song of the Three Holy Children: this has three parts. The first is a prayer of Azariah (also known as Abednego in Babylon) while the three youths were in the fiery furnace (verses 1-22); an account of an angel of the Lord who drive out the fiery flame from the furnace (verses 23-27) and the song the three sang when they had been delivered from the furnace (28-68). The Story of Susanna is the story of a beautiful but virtuous woman who some unscrupulous men tried to blackmail into having sex with them. She refused and was arrested and awaiting the death penalty, when Daniel intervened and challenged her accusers. Under questioning it became clear that they were lying and were themselves put to death. The story of Bel and the Dragon has three strands to it. A confrontation between Daniel and the King about whether the idol ‘Bel’ was real or not; the story of a dragon which Daniel slayed and an additional story of Daniel in the lion’s den in which the prophet Habakkuk fed him some stew.
    [Show full text]
  • Syllabus, Deuterocanonical Books
    The Deuterocanonical Books (Tobit, Judith, 1 & 2 Maccabees, Wisdom, Sirach, Baruch, and additions to Daniel & Esther) Caravaggio. Saint Jerome Writing (oil on canvas), c. 1605-1606. Galleria Borghese, Rome. with Dr. Bill Creasy Copyright © 2021 by Logos Educational Corporation. All rights reserved. No part of this course—audio, video, photography, maps, timelines or other media—may be reproduced or transmitted in any form by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or by any information storage or retrieval devices without permission in writing or a licensing agreement from the copyright holder. Scripture texts in this work are taken from the New American Bible, revised edition © 2010, 1991, 1986, 1970 Confraternity of Christian Doctrine, Washington, D.C. and are used by permission of the copyright owner. All Rights Reserved. No part of the New American Bible may be reproduced in any form without permission in writing from the copyright owner. 2 The Deuterocanonical Books (Tobit, Judith, 1 & 2 Maccabees, Wisdom, Sirach, Baruch, and additions to Daniel & Esther) Traditional Authors: Various Traditional Dates Written: c. 250-100 B.C. Traditional Periods Covered: c. 250-100 B.C. Introduction The Deuterocanonical books are those books of Scripture written (for the most part) in Greek that are accepted by Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches as inspired, but they are not among the 39 books written in Hebrew accepted by Jews, nor are they accepted as Scripture by most Protestant denominations. The deuterocanonical books include: • Tobit • Judith • 1 Maccabees • 2 Maccabees • Wisdom (also called the Wisdom of Solomon) • Sirach (also called Ecclesiasticus) • Baruch, (including the Letter of Jeremiah) • Additions to Daniel o “Prayer of Azariah” and the “Song of the Three Holy Children” (Vulgate Daniel 3: 24- 90) o Suzanna (Daniel 13) o Bel and the Dragon (Daniel 14) • Additions to Esther Eastern Orthodox churches also include: 3 Maccabees, 4 Maccabees, 1 Esdras, Odes (which include the “Prayer of Manasseh”) and Psalm 151.
    [Show full text]
  • What About the Apocryphal Books?
    What about the Apocryphal Books? By Martin Pickup Many people are aware of the fact that a Catholic Bible contains some extra books that are not found in most other Bibles. The Old Testament portion of a Catholic Bible includes some additional books that are called the Apocrypha. Are these additional books inspired of God? Should they be granted a place in a Christian=s canon? The term apocrypha literally means Ahidden books.@ Centuries ago the term was used to refer to writings deemed to be esoteric and appropriate reading only for mature believers rather than for the masses. Later, the term came to designate certain writings that some early Christians regarded as part of the Old Testament Scriptures. These works were Tobit, The Letter of Jeremiah, Judith, 1 & 2 Esdras, Additions to Esther, Sirach, Baruch, Additions to Daniel, The Prayer of Manasseh, 1 & 2 Maccabees, and The Wisdom of Solomon. All of these apocryphal works were composed between 200 B 30 BC, hundreds of years after the time when the 39 books of the Old Testament were completed. Some Christians in the early centuries did believe that some of the Apocrypha were inspired. In 1546 the Roman Catholic Church officially gave to most of the Apocryphal books a deutero-canonical status (which effectively signified a secondary level of canonicity), and included them thereafter in all Catholic Bibles. 1 & 2 Esdras and the Prayer of Manasseh were the exceptions; the Council of Trent denied these three works any degree of canonicity. Protestants have historically disavowed the inspiration and canonicity of the entire Apocrypha, though up until about 1825 Protestant Bibles still commonly included the 1 2 Apocrypha in a special section.
    [Show full text]
  • 2 Maccabees Reconsidered,“ ZNW 51 (1960) 10–30
    21-2Mc-NETS-4.qxd 11/10/2009 10:31 PM Page 503 2 MAKKABEES TO THE READER EDITION OF THE GREEK TEXT The Greek text used as the basis of the present translation is R. Hanhart’s Göttingen edition, Maccabaeo- rum libri I-IV, 2: Maccabaeorum liber II, copiis usus quas reliquit Werner Kappler edidit Robert Hanhart (Septu- aginta: Vetus Testamentum Graecum Auctoritate Societatis Litterarum Göttingensis editum IX [Göttingen: Van- denhoeck & Ruprecht, 2nd ed., 1976 (1959)]), which forms part of the Göttingen Septuagint and is the standard critically established text of contemporary Septuagint scholarship. The texts provided by H. B. Swete, The Old Testament in Greek, According to the Septuagint (vol. 3; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1912), A. Rahlfs, Septuaginta. Id est Vetus Testamentum graece iuxta LXX interpretes (9th ed.; Stuttgart: Württembergische Bibelanstalt, 1935) and F.-M. Abel, Les livres des Maccabées (Etudes Bibliques; Paris: J. Gabalda, 1949) were also consulted. It was not always possible to follow the text reconstructed by Hanhart. Wherever the present transla- tor’s textual-critical decisions differ from those of Hanhart, this has been indicated in the footnotes. Some of the considerations that necessitated such decisions are laid out in the next section. THE NETS TRANSLATION OF 2 MAKKABEES The Text of 2 Makkabees Any critical edition of 2 Makkabees relies mainly on two famous Greek uncial manuscripts: the Codex Alexandrinus (fifth century) and the Codex Venetus (eighth century). There is also a rich tradition of Greek minuscule manuscripts, as well as manuscript witnesses to Syriac, Armenian and Latin transla- tions. There also is a Coptic fragment of some passages from 2 Makk 5–6.1 Hanhart’s edition is based mainly on Alexandrinus and on minuscules 55, 347 and 771.
    [Show full text]